At 06:16 AM 6/9/2003, you wrote:
Dante Alighieri wrote:
I'm sorry, but if other people want to censor information from themselves and children in their charge, that's /their/ problem, not ours. I don't
see
why we need to be held hostage to the Puritanical views of a few people
out
there who think that it would somehow be a disaster if a child read the felching article. Why do their work for them? If they want a filter, let /them/ write it. Let /them/ argue what it should filter. Let's leave Wikipedia just the way it is.
In what we are we held hostage just by including content metadata and allowing people a simple option for how they want to view the wikipedia? I think such dramatic analogies would be appropriate if our only possible course of actions were to either self-censor or let it all hang out, but it seems to me that we have several promising alternatives that pose a useful compromise.
Again, I ask you to think not of schools and their issues, but of me and my issues. I'm a modern person offended by almost nothing. And yet, I wouldn't like to be showing my mother wikipedia and say, o.k., here is how you edit, and over here is where people can see the recent changes, and OH MY!!, er, well, uh, really, this isn't about porn, ma.
Well, I'm making a straight slippery slope argument. The first step is of course, reasonable, it's the eighth step that worries me.
----- Dante Alighieri dalighieri@digitalgrapefruit.com
"The darkest places in hell are reserved for those who maintain their neutrality in times of great moral crisis." -Dante Alighieri, 1265-1321